PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Why buy it

✅Costs $5,329 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $5,489 MSRP).
✅Delivers 437.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 15.2 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $5,489 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 280W, a 215W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 64,355).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +43.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 128 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅700% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.2 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($5,489 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌330.8% higher power demand at 280W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Core i5-10400F

2020

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX

2020

Why buy it

✅Costs $5,329 less on MSRP ($160 MSRP vs $5,489 MSRP).
✅Delivers 437.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 81.4 vs 15.2 PassMark/$ ($160 MSRP vs $5,489 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 280W, a 215W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +43.1% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 64 cores / 128 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅700% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (8,191 vs 64,355).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX, which brings 64 cores / 128 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 15.2 vs 81.4 PassMark/$ ($5,489 MSRP vs $160 MSRP).
❌330.8% higher power demand at 280W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i5-10400F.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX better than Core i5-10400F?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core i5-10400F is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 43.1% more average FPS across 4 shared CPU game tests. It also has a big cache advantage at 256 MB vs 12 MB.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX is the better fit. You are getting 685.7% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 64 cores and 128 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 2033.3% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 12 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i5-10400F makes more sense if price matters more than absolute performance. Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX is 3330.6% more expensive on MSRP at $5,489 MSRP versus $160 MSRP, and it gives you a 43.1% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-10400F is also 437.0% better value on MSRP (81.4 vs 15.2 PassMark/$), which is why it is easier to justify for price-conscious builds on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 3D V-Cache and a much larger 256 MB L3 cache instead of 12 MB and more multi-core headroom with 64 cores / 128 threads instead of 6/12. That extra cache should hold up really well in CPU-limited games and high-refresh builds.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core i5-10400F Benchmark Check

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX
1080p
low	192 FPS	173 FPS
medium	152 FPS	142 FPS
high	123 FPS	121 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	97 FPS
1440p
low	153 FPS	152 FPS
medium	119 FPS	122 FPS
high	97 FPS	97 FPS
ultra	79 FPS	78 FPS
4K
low	82 FPS	71 FPS
medium	70 FPS	61 FPS
high	55 FPS	48 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	40 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX
1080p
low	326 FPS	571 FPS
medium	318 FPS	495 FPS
high	290 FPS	380 FPS
ultra	253 FPS	325 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	480 FPS
medium	292 FPS	423 FPS
high	267 FPS	336 FPS
ultra	234 FPS	272 FPS
4K
low	309 FPS	301 FPS
medium	258 FPS	269 FPS
high	235 FPS	230 FPS
ultra	199 FPS	201 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX
1080p
low	326 FPS	660 FPS
medium	326 FPS	546 FPS
high	326 FPS	481 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	412 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	555 FPS
medium	326 FPS	465 FPS
high	326 FPS	412 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	354 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	406 FPS
medium	326 FPS	323 FPS
high	289 FPS	285 FPS
ultra	229 FPS	227 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX
1080p
low	326 FPS	909 FPS
medium	326 FPS	818 FPS
high	326 FPS	695 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	604 FPS
1440p
low	326 FPS	739 FPS
medium	326 FPS	643 FPS
high	326 FPS	545 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	463 FPS
4K
low	326 FPS	514 FPS
medium	326 FPS	461 FPS
high	326 FPS	407 FPS
ultra	326 FPS	346 FPS

Open Core i5-10400F Open Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i5-10400F and Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX

Core i5-10400F

The Core i5-10400F is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 April 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 13,029 points. Launch price was $155.

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX

The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 14 July 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Matisse (2019−2020) architecture. It features 64 cores and 128 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: sWRX8. Thermal design power (TDP): 280 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 83,235 points. Launch price was $5,500.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i5-10400F packs 6 cores / 12 threads, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX offers 64 cores / 128 threads — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX has 58 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the Core i5-10400F versus 4.2 GHz on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX — a 2.4% clock advantage for the Core i5-10400F (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2.7 GHz). The Core i5-10400F uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX uses Matisse (2019−2020) (7 nm, 12 nm). In PassMark, the Core i5-10400F scores 13,029 against the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX's 83,235 — a 145.9% lead for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 8,191 vs 64,355 (154.8% advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 1,454 vs 1,266, a 13.8% lead for the Core i5-10400F that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 5,783 vs 20,256 (111.2% advantage for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX). L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core i5-10400F vs 256 MB on the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX
Cores / Threads	6 / 12	64 / 128+967%
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+2%	4.2 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+7%	2.7 GHz
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	256 MB+2033%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	512K (per core)+100%
Process	14 nm	7 nm, 12 nm-50%
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Matisse (2019−2020)
PassMark	13,029	83,235+539%
Cinebench R23 Multi	8,191	64,355+686%
Geekbench 6 Single	1,454+15%	1,266
Geekbench 6 Multi	5,783	20,256+250%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i5-10400F uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX uses sWRX8 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR4-2666 memory speed. The Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX supports up to 2048 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 176.5% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core i5-10400F) vs 8 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX). PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i5-10400F) vs 128 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX) — the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX offers 112 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Core i5-10400F) and WRX80 (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX).

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX
Socket	LGA1200	sWRX8
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 4.0+33%
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666	DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	2048 GB+1500%
RAM Channels	2	8+300%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	128+700%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i5-10400F) vs true (Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX). Primary use case: Core i5-10400F targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Core i5-10400F rivals Ryzen 5 3600; Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX rivals Xeon Platinum 8280.

Feature	Core i5-10400F	Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	—	None
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	true
Target Use	Gaming	—

💰

Value Analysis

The Core i5-10400F launched at $160 MSRP, while the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX debuted at $5489. On MSRP ($160 vs $5489), the Core i5-10400F is $5329 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i5-10400F delivers 81.4 pts/$ vs 15.2 pts/$ for the Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3995WX — making the Core i5-10400F the 137.2% better value option.